Meta

Angry White Men

I am sick to death of hearing this narrative in the media. Mainly because it’s the same narrative that the liberal left uses again and again. They use it so much that I’m certain you’ve heard it.

In fact you probably already know what I’m going to say even though the entire first paragraph would be vague without this title. I’m talking about the stereotype they bring out anytime there’s a serial killer, a mass shooter, or violent repeat sexual offender.

You know the story. He’s the boogeyman in your closet; the angry white male. He’s the scapegoat for all the problems in the first world. He’s the destroyer of virginity, the perpetuator of racism, the reason for climate change. He is both everywhere and no where. He is a loner, yet he is somehow the product of rampant misogyny being normalized within our society.

He is both the average, and the abnormal. The sane, and the insane. He eats kittens for breakfast. and rapes our very innocence. He is both delusional, and somehow of sound mind. He is the Angry White Male.

Now it doesn’t matter that out of the literal millions of white men in the first world, very few actually perform these extreme acts of violence. It doesn’t matter if this person is obviously mentally ill. It doesn’t matter if they acted alone, and with few actual affiliations.

Because the story of the Angry white man, changes depending on who is using it for their own political gain. A male who may be of mixed race, becomes the angry white man, if it helps to push the narrative forward. A male who is liberal, can become conservative. A man who is anti-gun can become an NRA supporter. Anything to help the story.

The narrative can push practically anything

anti-gun

anti-sexism

anti-video games

anti-porn

anti-racism

It only needs to be loosely related to the crime in question. At that point the truth doesn’t matter and people project whatever they’d like to onto a tragedy. Reality might as well not exist, because they have created their own.

People need a scapegoat, and the angry white man is a perfect fit because he can’t fight back. Because if he does, it only reassures their pre-existing beliefs. If he becomes frustrated, then can just say, “The media was right. White men are the devil after all.”

Now this is not a post defending the actions of criminals. I am however condemning how the media plays this narrative up every single time. Because these incidents are not the only time gun violence takes place in the united states. It’s not the only time that you see several people raped or murdered in a single night. Gangs engage in a drive by shooting that kills people, no one raises an eyebrow, but if some scrawny white dude writes a manifesto and guns people down, people lose their minds.

Let me put this into perspective. More people die in accidental gun deaths every year than they do in mass shootings caused by single angry white men. People’s perception becomes skewed because the media makes these criminals like a kind of morbid celebrity, and they obsessively document everything about their lives and hype these rare crimes over the minor gun incidents that kill thousands every year.

Pushing fear in the unknown angry white man is easier that owning up to the cumulative number of gang related deaths every year. Which kill an estimated 2000 people annually. But this truth is inconvenient because gangs are typically associated with ethnic minorities.

This is not to say that race is the cause of these problems. I am however saying the topic of race is the reason why the media doesn’t want to touch gang and overall crime related gun violence with a ten foot pole. Because they fear that doing so will make them appear racist. So the story of the Angry white man is the most convenient one, because it allows them to discuss the topic of gun violence, by hitting the socially acceptable punching bag; the angry white man.

All without discussing the elephant in the room, which is that more gun related deaths are committed in urban environments with handguns than anywhere else in the US. Meaning that there is a huge correlation between gun related homicides and densely populated areas where the over all crime rate is higher by a considerable margin. But as I’ve said before, when reality doesn’t match the political narrative, they create their own.

Because if you say that you are most likely to be murdered by a handgun if you are a black man who lives in a city, and you happen to be in the bad part of town, that doesn’t jive well with the politically correct crowd.

Even more inconvenient is the fact that 61% of gun related deaths are suicides. With 19,392 Americans killing themselves with a gun in 2010 alone. Meaning it’s far more likely for white men as a whole to kill themselves with a handgun than they are to go on a mass shooting.

But none of that fucking matters when the media works people up into a frenzy, and hardly anyone holds these journalists accountable for their actions. In fact the only people who seem to do it are the conservative right who have their own agenda. So we’re all stuck in the middle of some stupid political agenda sandwich, where they bitch about guns, gender, and race with little regard for the impact that it has on society.

They don’t care that they skew people’s perception of reality. They don’t care that they are causing unneeded hysteria, and a completely irrational bias against white men. A bias so bad that it’s forever altered the American school system and has driven them to becoming security freaks.

It’s a stereotype that is pushed in every realm. They use it to silence people and to further push the idea, that white heterosexual men are cumulatively the most evil group of people that have ever lived.

That my friends is why the stereotype of the Angry White male boogeyman is utter bullshit. Because it is a means of distracting people from the larger human problems that exist in every society; problems that will exist regardless of whether or not guns and white men are present. Then they blame the most convenient punching bag for those human problems, and act as though they are just concerned citizens who care about the state of the world. All while they push an agenda of hate against entire demographics of people.

Rachel is a former host of Honey Badger Radio, a recurring member of the Tales from the Infrared crew. She wanders around the web researching feminist insanity, poking people with a large stick, and keeping everyone in the silly place. When she isn't doing any of those things she spends her time doing even more blogging, grooming her rather large fluffy cat, nerding out with her favorite people, and burying herself in various fandoms. Pinkie Pie is best Pony! (You spelled "Fluttershy" wrong. -- Zen)

“It’s a stereotype that is pushed in every realm. ”
Stereotypes are what lazy and stupid people use instead of thought. The effort of thinking clearly is to much for them. This is true on all reaches of the political spectrum.

Thank you for the article. Male circumcision at 100 deaths a year, approximately? What is your source for this, please? I am aware of the Dan Bollinger study, and I know it has been very heavily criticised. I am open to the possibility that more circumcision deaths occur than are officially registered as such, but I have seen nothing to replicate or corroborate the Bollinger claims. Personally I am not a fan of routine elective circumcision, and a death rate of 18+ a year would be enough to make the death toll greater than mass shootings, but 100 a year, almost… Really? I need the evidence before I repeat to my peer group.

Rachel

I should clarify that this is estimated per year in the US, and the number varies. But this is the number they usually use in the media. The point was making is that less people die every year in mass shootings than infants dying from unneeded surgery. The number could be much higher because often doctors don’t do follow ups with baby boys afterwards, and if they die of some unknown infection, it isn’t always identified if circumcision was the cause, so it doesn’t get logged. I rounded down from 117, because the number varied depending on who was giving it out. When I write these things, I often write it for the tumblr crowd that will notice it. So I go more conservative with the numbers. The exact number from the Dan Bollinger study was not needed for the point I was making and it’s my mistake. I will edit to reflect this.

anyhowtown prufrock

Thank you for the reply. Personally I think approximately 117 a year is a bit on the high side, but I am fairly sure the actual figures are bad enough to justify your mass shooting/circumcision comparison.

Andy C

So I don’t need an exorcism to rid my new home of AngryWhiteMan demons? Well that saved me paying the local feminist high priestess to come round … 😛

YetAnotherCommenter

Note that the “angry white man” stereotype often goes a bit further than simply “angry white man” – often, said angry white man is also a “social misfit” or “loner” or a “loser” of some kind.
There has to be some sort of significance to that. The whole “loners are freaks” prejudice seems excessively elevated with respect to white males.